Timi Gustafson, R.D.

Helping people to live healthy and fulfilling lives.

Emotional Eating – A Widespread But Poorly Understood Health Problem

September 16th, 2012 at 7:21 am by timigustafson
  • Comments

There is no general agreement among the experts on the exact causes of the growing obesity crisis in America and around the world. Easy access to inexpensive calorie-dense but nutritionally poor food and sedentary lifestyles are often named as leading factors. Our culture that promotes ever-increasing consumption my also play a role. But could it be that our eating habits can make us not only physically ill but also harm our psychological and emotional well-being?

In her book, titled “Emotional Overeating” (2012), Dr. Marcia Sirota, a Toronto-based psychiatrist who specializes in the treatment of addiction, says that constant eating, especially when it leads to weight problems, is actually a form of psychotic behavior.

“It seems as though we’ve become a society of addicts,” she says. “In particular, we’ve become a nation of compulsive overeaters, hyper-focused on everything having to do with food and eating.”

Even our efforts to control our weight through dieting can fit this pattern, says Dr. Sirota. “We’re compulsive in our eating behaviors, whether this means binge eating, restricting, purging, or a combination of all these. […] Both compulsive eating and compulsive food restricting (dieting) cause a behavioral vicious circle in which overeating leads to remorse, self-recrimination, heightened obsessions and further overeating.” The result is enormous emotional suffering, “suffering from a constant preoccupation with food and weight.”

Dr. Sirota believes that it is actually not desire for food that lies at the root of this kind of addiction but rather an inner emptiness, hurt or loss that needs to be filled. In other words, emotional eating is not about stilling hunger but numbing a pervasive state of unhappiness.

“When it comes to our relationship with food, there is much more going on than we would often assume,” says Dr. Lisa Firestone, a clinical psychologist in Santa Barbara, California. Like any addictive substance, food is often used to cover over or subdue emotional pain.”

But that’s not necessarily the case with all people who eat for emotional reasons. We should not assume that food, especially so-called “comfort food,” is only there to help us get out of a funk, when we are depressed, bored or lonely, says Dr. Brian Wansink, author of “Mindless Eating – Why We Eat More Than We Think” (Bantam, 2006). Food can just as well evoke feelings of safety, love or belonging and reconnect us with happy memories of loved ones and past events. Also, most people eat more than they should when they are celebrating, when they eat out or gather at the table on holidays. Fewer than half reach for the munchies when they have the blues or the blahs, he says.

Still, he concedes, there are significant differences between physical hunger and emotional hunger. Physical hunger builds gradually and recedes when the stomach is filled. By contrast, emotional hunger arises suddenly, unrelated to the time you last ate, and it persists even after sufficient food intake, thereby often leading to overindulgence. Also, there is no negative psychological fall-out after eating in response to physical hunger. But there can be feelings of shame and guilt after bouts of emotional overeating.

Using food to satisfy our emotional needs every so often does not necessarily have to be considered problematic. “We all eat for emotional reasons sometimes,” says Jane Jakubczak, a Registered Dietitian at the University of Maryland. “When eating becomes the only or main strategy a person uses to manage emotions, then the problems arise – especially if the foods a person is choosing to eat to satisfy emotions aren’t exactly healthy.”

By dealing constructively with our emotions, we can achieve a healthy relationship with food as well, says Deborah Kotz, a health writer from Silver Spring, Maryland. She advises people with tendencies toward emotional overeating to pay close attention to their reactions to stress, sadness or boredom. What actions can you take to avoid eating when temptation arises? Establish some rules before a craving attack takes place and follow through with your plan. Engage in activities that distract you. Avoid dieting, since it can lead to other forms of negative food addiction. The more you learn about the nature of your tendencies, the better you will be prepared to exercise restraint and stay in control when you need to.

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

What Do You Really Know About Healthy Eating?

September 12th, 2012 at 7:07 am by timigustafson
  • Comments

Most Americans think they’re healthier than they actually are. Considering that well over 60 percent of the U.S. population is struggling with weight problems, that is quite surprising. Yet 80 percent of participants in a recent survey identified themselves as “extremely healthy” or “very healthy.” But only 20 percent claimed to have what is considered an all-around healthy diet, according to the NPD group, a leading market research company that conducted the study.

Despite of the overly positive self-assessment, about half of the almost 2,000 adults who were interviewed agreed that their existing diet could use some help. Roughly half of those said that changing their eating habits would require some exclusion of certain foods (presumably of lesser nutritional quality) as well as inclusion of others (presumably of higher nutritional quality). 26 percent saw the need to add more healthy foods, and only 19 percent thought they needed to cut back on what they usually ate. There were slightly fewer respondents claiming to be on a weight loss diet than in previous years when similar research was done.

Other studies have found that it is not rare for people who are overweight or obese to misjudge their size, sometimes considerably. Researchers from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign found in a study on weight problems among young Hispanics that only a minority of overweight or obese participants judged their body size accurately. Nearly 60 percent of those whose BMI identified them as overweight described themselves as normal weight, while 75 percent of those who were obese thought they were merely overweight. One in three women does not realize when she gains five pounds and 15 percent aren’t aware of weight increases of more then 10 pounds, according to a survey by the University of Texas in Galveston.

Even for Americans who are interested in eating better and keeping their waistline from expanding, maintaining a healthier lifestyle remains an uphill battle. Food prices, especially for fresh produce, are high and keep rising. Contradictory messages like a recent study that questioned the benefits of buying organic add more uncertainty. Many consumers either give up altogether or make inconsistent dietary decisions. “There’s complete confusion,” said Maria Mogelonsky, a food analyst for a global marketing firm in an interview with the New York Times on the subject. “Most people have a randomly arranged set of diet principles. They buy organics sometimes. They buy based on price sometimes. Very few people are completely committed to one cause,” she said.

So what advice is there to give?

• The first thing I tell my clients is not to make their dietary improvements too complicated. If your new regimen doesn’t fit your lifestyle, it won’t stick, no matter how hard you try.

• Learn a few basic facts about nutrition (your body needs over 40 different nutrients every day), and how you can achieve and maintain balance in your diet.

• Don’t start controlling your food intake by counting calories. Rather, watch your portion sizes. Your stomach’s size is roughly equivalent to the size of your fist. Your servings should not exceed that.

• Gradually increase your consumption of healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. At the same time, decrease your intake of processed and packaged foods.

• Buy fresh produce as much and as often as it fits your budget. To save costs, choose locally grown, seasonal items whenever possible. Farmers markets can offer better quality at lower prices than supermarkets.

• Prepare most of your meals from scratch. Eating out or grabbing some take-out on the way home should be the exception, not the rule.

• Make water your primary beverage. Avoid sodas and keep caffeine and alcohol to a minimum.

• Get enough exercise to burn off calories your body doesn’t need.

If all or some of this is too challenging for you right now, take the steps you can manage and work toward the rest as you go.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “Will Rising Food Prices Change America’s Eating Habits.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Fight Over Sweeteners Is About Profit, Not Health Issues

September 9th, 2012 at 12:58 pm by timigustafson
  • Comments

A group of food companies has filed a lawsuit against the Sugar Association, a trade group representing the sugar industry, for making false claims in advertising that allegedly caused loss of profit and other damages. Their action comes on the heels of an earlier complaint issued by the sugar industry against makers and users of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) for saying that their product was essentially identical to sugar and should be marketed as such. Last year, the Corn Refiners Association (CRA) had asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to change the name HFCS to “corn sugar,” a request that was ultimately rejected.

HFCS is derived from corn and is cheaper to produce than natural sugar made from sugarbeets and sugarcane. Both are present in countless foods and beverages Americans consume every day, and some experts believe there is a strong connection between these sweeteners and the current obesity crisis. In fact, studies have linked the consumption of large amounts of added sweeteners to widespread illnesses, including obesity, diabetes, heart disease and dental problems. The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends an upper limit of 100 calories for women (about 6 teaspoons) and 150 calories for men (about 9 teaspoons) from added sugar per day.

That high sugar consumption, whatever the source may be, can be detrimental to people’s health is not disputed, not even by the respective industries. In a public statement referring to the lawsuit, the CRA says that “vilifying one kind of added sugar [in this case, HFCS] will not reduce American’s waistlines. Reducing all added sugars and reducing calorie intake in general will.” The real issue is, the statement continues, that “Americans should reduce their consumption of all added sugars and calories in general.”

Considering that sweeteners in all forms are added to so many food products, including those that don’t necessarily taste sweet, it is hard to see how consumers could control their intake on their own. The question is not whether sweeteners are “nutritionally equivalent” and “indistinguishable once they are absorbed in the blood stream,” as the CRA statement claims, but how consumers can be protected from potential harm to their health and be helped to make better choices.

Whether it’s HFCS or added sugar, the fact that they are almost ubiquitous ingredients in our highly processed food and drink supply leaves consumers without much chance to improve their diet. And besides, are we really to believe that food manufacturers whose profitability depends on ever-increasing sales are serious about encouraging the public to buy fewer of their products? If that was the case, why do they keep spending billions of dollars in advertising, including to children?

What’s at stake here is consumer spending – not health concerns. The damages that are being claimed are price erosion and lost profits – not damages done to people’s nutritional and physical well-being from products that may be associated with some of the most widespread health problems we are confronted with today.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “Why It’s So Hard to Escape the Sugar Trap.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Why Are We So Confused About Our Health Needs?

September 2nd, 2012 at 2:24 pm by timigustafson
  • Comments

Two out of three Americans would benefit from losing weight and becoming more physically fit. For one out of three, it could be a lifesaver. Weight problems and obesity, combined with other diet- and lifestyle related diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure and cancer, are at the forefront of our ever-worsening public health crisis. All this is well documented and communicated, and yet, it seems, there is no turning point in sight.

What would it take to persuade Americans to take better care of their health? One would think that fear of debilitating illnesses or premature aging would be enough motivation to get the ball rolling, but nothing of the kind seems to materialize.

For decades, we have been bombarded with messages that health-promoting behavior is important, and most folks agree with those goals – but without much consequence for their actions, according to Jane E. Brody, a health columnist for the New York Times. She suggests that health experts should reframe the messages they’ve been giving and make them more relevant to everyday life.

People are thoroughly confused about the often-contradictory messages they’re receiving. Those who follow health news at all must be especially frustrated with the so-called “new findings” that regularly invalidate their efforts to live more healthily.

There is still general agreement that our weight problems come from overeating and lack of exercise. But we also hear that this may or may not be true, or at least it may not be the whole story.

For example, “Eat up,” was the headline of a recent article on the benefits of calorie-restriction, which was based on one study’s conclusion that slim monkeys did not have a longer life expectancy than their overweight peers. In other words, if eating less doesn’t let you live longer, why not dig in while you can? “Exercise is not enough when it comes to weight loss,” says another. So why bother getting sweaty?

In the face of such inconsistencies in our health messages, who can blame those who simply give up and let the chips fall wherever they may?

Both dieting and exercising are thought of as temporary measures (primarily for weight loss) by many who hope for quick fixes, as opposed to making permanent lifestyle changes. When a particular goal – e.g. shedding a few pounds for a wedding or a reunion – is achieved, the return to old habits is almost inevitable. The motivation is gone and so is the stick-to-itiveness. But it’s also the confusion that comes with the mixed signals we’re constantly confronted with.

A proper diet is important for health and exercise is necessary to keep our bodies strong, says Carrie Burrows, founder of thebootcampblog.org. There should be no confusion about that. But then the experts have us believe that getting enough exercise is the only thing that matters because we can burn off calories, no matter where they come from or how many we consume. Or, that the kind of foods we eat makes all the difference, whether we exercise or not.

“Food manufacturers and food product suppliers depend on you eating crappy food. They have a vested interest in you eating more. Gym facilities depend on you spending your money there but never walking through the doors,” she says. If those were our only sources of information to take care of our health needs, we would be clearly out of luck.

What’s the alternative? Educating ourselves as much as possible. Cutting through the confusion and overcoming our own limitations, including our ingrained habits, preferences and biases, is a continuing task each and every one of us has to perform. It takes our entire lifetime and we can’t count on much help from the outside.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “The Meaning of Good Health.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Living Long, Living Well

August 29th, 2012 at 5:47 pm by timigustafson
  • Comments

Americans may be less optimistic about the future in general than they once were, but a solid majority still hopes to enjoy a long life. In fact, longevity is considered by most as part of a good life, on par with health, prosperity and loving relationships.

60 percent expect to live at least until they’re 80. 40 percent think 120 to 150 years could be feasible within their own lifetime due to further advancements in medical and biological technology. And one percent believes that death could eventually be eliminated altogether, according to a survey conducted by David Ewing Duncan, a science writer and author of “When I’m 164: The New Science of Radical Life Extension and What Happens If It Succeeds.”

Considering that two thirds of the population are currently dealing with weight problems and a host of lifestyle-related diseases, this may be wishful thinking for many. But the fact is that the average life expectancy has indeed dramatically increased over the last century due to improved hygiene, diet and medical care. In 1900, people could expect to live just under 50 years. In the year 2000, it was nearly 77. The average lifespan was lengthened between 1.5 and 2.7 years per decade, according to data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau.

What’s even more stunning is that our chances of living longer seem to go up all the time. How so? “Because the more time you spend in the world, the more time the world gives you,” says Ted C. Fishman, author of “Shock of Gray” (Scribner, 2010). “For every hour we live,” he claims, “the average human lifespan increases between eleven and fifteen minutes. Every day sees the average lifespan grow another five hours.”

Of course, that doesn’t apply for everyone across the globe, Fishman admits. “Your odds are better if you have avoided the obesity epidemic and live in a place that enjoys good health care, education, and freedom from war and terrible poverty.” It also helps if you can manage to stay mentally fit and don’t suffer from memory loss and cognitive decline. A loving family, a circle of friends and other supportive social surroundings add to your chances.

Unfortunately, many of these important factors for longevity cannot be taken for granted. Baby boomers, now entering retirement, are rightly worried about their prospects when it comes to their financial security, health needs and social life.

“It does not bode well for the baby boom generation at all,” warns Dr. S. Jay Olshansky, a professor for public health at the University of Illinois at Chicago who studies longevity, in an interview with Reuters. More recent studies show that life expectancy gains in the U.S. have actually flattened out since the 1960s. Despite of dramatically increasing expenditures for health care, many Americans live with chronic diseases that are left insufficiently treated, especially among the uninsured and those with limited coverage. One study concluded that poorer citizens have on average a shorter lifespan of up to five years than the more affluent.

Obviously, money can’t buy everything and life remains an uncertain enterprise no matter how rich you are. For the rest of us, there are plenty of opportunities to take care of our health and well-being by eating right, exercising, etc. (you know the drill) – and for this, it’s never too early to get started.

Researchers found that physical fitness achieved during middle-age can lower the risk of developing chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure in later years and may be associated with compression of morbidity at old age. Compression of morbidity is what many health experts consider the optimal outcome of aging. The idea is “to delay the onset of age-related disease and inevitable decline without worrying about extending life,” writes Dr. Andrew Weil, author of numerous best-selling health books, including “Healthy Aging” (Knopf, 2005). Not longevity itself should be our first concern, but the quality of life we have as long as we are around, he says.

This reminds me of the late Steve Jobs, the founder of Apple Inc. who died last year at the age of 56, when he spoke of the inevitability of death at his 2005 Stanford Commencement Address.

“No one wants to die,” he said. “Even people who want to go to heaven don’t want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one ever escaped it. And that is as it should be because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life’s change agent. […] Your time is limited,” he ended, “so don’t waste it…”

Even the longest life can be a waste if it’s not brought to its full potential. Even the shortest life is rich and fulfilled if it’s lived well.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “The High Cost of Living Longer.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Freedom of Choice Includes the Right to Know

August 26th, 2012 at 2:59 pm by timigustafson
  • Comments

New Yorkers are divided over Mayor Bloomberg’s proposal to limit the size of sodas they can buy, according to a poll conducted by the New York Times. Proponents of the initiative argue that such legislation is necessary to curb obesity and raise awareness about the harmful health effects of sugary drinks. Those opposed to the measure say consumers should have the freedom to make their own choices and not be coerced by an increasingly intrusive “nanny state” mentality of government.

The American Beverage Association, in collaboration with restaurant chains and other retail outlets that risk losing millions of dollars in revenue if the Bloomberg plan gets approved next month, have launched a formidable counter-campaign, insisting that liberty itself is at stake if the government gets its way.

Meanwhile in California, an entirely different scenario is taking shape. Voters will decide in the November election whether consumers should have the right to know what goes in their food. Proposition 37, if it passes, will require food manufacturers to disclose whether their products contain genetically modified organisms (GMO).

Genetic engineering is a process by which the DNA of living organisms is changed to improve certain qualities such as faster growth or resistance to pests. It is estimated that 40 to 70 percent of foods currently sold in grocery stores in California contain some genetically altered ingredients.

Countless food items like baby formula, corn flakes or soymilk have such components, although they are not labeled as such. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require safety studies, and no long-term research on potential health effects has been conducted yet, although there are reports of preliminary studies that have linked GMOs to allergies and other health risks.

There are also environmental concerns. Critics say that GMO crops have led to an overall increase in pesticide use and unintentional contamination of non-GMO crops.

Proposition 37 does not intend to impose any bans. “It’s simply saying: Let’s give consumers information so we can choose for ourselves whether or not we want to eat genetically engineered foods. Consumers in 50 other countries – including all of Europe, Japan, China and Russia – all have this right,” argued Grant Lundberg, the CEO of Lundberg Family Farms, and Kathryn Phillips, Director of the Sierra Club California, both strong supporters of the measure, in an op-ed article in the San Francisco Chronicle’s online publication, SFGate.

Having started as a grassroots movement, Proposition 37 has a good chance of succeeding. As reported by the Los Angeles Times, a whopping 65 percent of registered voters in California say they support the measure.

But so far, less than 3 million dollars have been raised by the organizers, mostly from organic farmers and environmental activists and their supporters. Opponents, mainly chemical and food-processing companies, including Monsanto, BASF, Bayer, Dow, Nestle, Coca Cola and Pepsico, have raised more than nine times as much, almost $25 million to date.

The question in both cases – the fight over New York City’s ban on supersized sodas and the disclosure requirement for GMO in California – is whether they are just another reflection of our political and social divisions or whether they are signs of a major shift in our relationship to our food and, in turn, to our health.

Food manufacturers are keenly aware that they are increasingly becoming a target for stricter legislation, like the tobacco industry before them. They are already facing a barrage of lawsuits brought by individual consumers and advocacy groups who feel mislead by false advertisement or worse. Their campaigns in defense of the status quo appear like last stands in a losing battle. Ignoring facts and keeping information secret is not a sustainable strategy in the long run. Once the paste is out of the tube, there is no putting it back in. California’s Right-to-Know movement could morph into something like that with the potential of spreading across the whole country.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “The Right to Know What’s in Your Food.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Taking Time Off Can Improve Health and Productivity

August 22nd, 2012 at 1:02 pm by timigustafson
  • Comments

Americans are overworked, stressed out, anxiety-ridden. Our fast-paced lifestyles are wearing us out. Persistent uncertainty about the economy is paralyzing us. Fear is a common response. Prescriptions for medications against anxiety and depression outrank for the first time all others, including drugs to lower cholesterol and blood pressure, according to the latest reports on spending for health care in the U.S.

In 1980, between two and four percent of Americans suffered from anxiety disorder, according to surveys conducted by the American Psychiatric Association on mental disorders. By 2009, follow-up studies showed a dramatic rise to 49.5 percent. That means 117 million U.S. citizens have been affected by disabling anxiety at least once in their lives.

What is happening? Why are we becoming suddenly a nation of nervous wrecks? Our lifestyle has certainly something to do with it. We don’t value free time and leisure as much as other cultures do. Two-hour lunches, midday siestas, weeks of paid vacations may be cherished customs elsewhere, but not here. We work longer hours with fewer breaks than almost any other developed nation. Even industrial powerhouses like Germany and France have 35-hour workweeks, but their productivity levels are among the highest in the world. On average, people there may have lower income rates, but their standard of living and quality of life are in many ways above the U.S.

Considering the price we pay in terms of our health and well-being, it may be time to question whether our traditional work ethic – which is essentially chasing the dime, no matter what – is still a worthy or even sustainable concept. In a recently published book, titled “How Much Is Enough,” (Other Press, 2012), the authors, Robert Skidelsky and Edward Skidelsky, a father-son team, argue that people who work too hard miss out on the “good life,” although that is supposedly the ultimate goal of their intense efforts, ideally becoming rich enough to enjoy a happy, carefree existence.

Skidelsky senior, a historian, and Skidelsky junior, a philosopher, cite the idea of the economist John Maynard Keynes that increasing per capita productivity through technological progress and other factors would eventually lead to a sharp decline in work hours, a theory that has clearly not been verified yet.

Yes, we have reduced our official workweek to 40 hours, but that is just the time we are required to spend in the office cubicle or at the assembly line. Long commutes, chores around the house, extracurricular activities for the kids, etc. cut deep into what’s left of the day. Doing nothing once in a while, lying in a hammock, listening to music, reading a book, painting a picture, playing an instrument, going on a trip – all that, it seems, has become an impossible dream. It doesn’t have to be this way.

Fortunately, the ability to change our way of life is not just stuff made up by academics. Forward-thinking companies like Google are well known for their efforts to enhance creativity by giving employees time off to pursue ideas of their own, regardless the outcome. Some of their most successful innovations have come out of that policy.

Much smaller enterprises are beginning to understand the advantages of allowing their people more space to play and explore as well. Jason Fried, co-founder and C.E.O. of 37signals, a software company, found that giving employees an entire month off to work on whatever they wanted was not only a great moral-booster but also resulted in an unprecedented burst of creativity, very much to the benefit of his business (see his article in the New York Times, 8/19/2012).

The all-American creed that hard work will make us successful may still linger for a long time to come. But eventually, we will have to accept our limits. Work alone does not guarantee success, as taking time off and pacing ourselves is not equivalent to laziness. There must be time for both to make the whole person.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “In Praise of Play.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

The Egg Controversy Revisited

August 19th, 2012 at 2:22 pm by timigustafson
  • Comments

Eating eggs can almost be as bad for your health as smoking, according to Canadian researchers whose findings reignited a long-standing controversy over the nutritional benefits and detriments of eggs, or more specifically, egg yolks.

For the study, which was published in the journal Atherosclerosis, a team of scientists from the University of Western Ontario’s medical school interviewed over 1,200 participants about their egg consumption as well as smoking habits, and then used ultrasound technology to measure the plaque build-up in their arteries.

Why the combination of egg eating and smoking? To give a better perspective on the magnitude of the effects of high cholesterol intake from egg yolk, a comparison to smoking appeared to be an appropriate marker, the researchers wrote in their report.

Egg yolk is well known for its high dietary cholesterol content – about 185 to 210 milligrams, depending on size. (The recommended limit is 300 milligrams per day.)

Over time, high cholesterol levels can cause plaque buildup in the arteries – as smoking does. In fact, the potential damage from egg yolk is about two-thirds as bad as that from tobacco use, said Dr. David Spence, the lead author of the study report, in a press release.

In response to the study, some critics have rejected its findings, calling the research “flawed.” As an example, Dr. Steven Nissen, chair of the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, expressed misgivings about the “very poor quality” of the study “that should not influence patients’ dietary choices.” According to Dr. Nissen, the research depended too heavily on participant’s self-reporting, which is notoriously unreliable, and other dietary and lifestyle factors were not or only insufficiently included.

Similar concerns were raised by Dr. David Frid, a cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic. He didn’t think egg consumption should be equated to smoking, even though both can contribute to ill heart health. Smoking, he said in an interview with ABCNews.com, causes arteries to become inflamed, which can result in the build-up of plaque, however, in a different way than from cholesterol. Moreover, he said, people who like eggs, often have a preference for other fatty foods. That possibility must be taken into account as well, he added.

In defense of the egg’s reputation, the Egg Nutrition Center and American Egg Board have released a statement, emphasizing the wide range of health benefits from essential vitamins, minerals, protein and antioxidants richly provided by eggs, combined with a relatively low calorie count of 70 calories on average. Even the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recognizes eggs as “a nutrient-dense food that can be part of a healthful diet,” it says in the statement. Canada’s Food Guide also changed its recommendations to allow for higher egg consumption after the Canadian Egg Marketing Agency voiced objections to the originally proposed guidelines.

Unfortunately, this recent controversy still leaves consumers uncertain about the safety of their egg dishes. In the face of all the pros and cons, it would appear that – as it is so often the case when it comes to food – moderation is the best way to go. Discarding the yolk and eating egg whites only is one possibility. Adding healthy items like spinach, mushrooms, peppers and the likes to your omelet can help balance potential downsides. Ultimately, until the experts come to a consensus, using our best judgment is pretty much all we have.

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Hollywood has decided to invest once more in a movie specifically aimed at baby boomers. After the considerable successes of “Something’s Gotta Give” (2003), “The Bucket List” (2007), and this year’s long-running box office hit, “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel,” “Hope Springs,” now in theaters, addresses another topic that is very much of concern for this aging generation: How does one maintain a decades-old marriage, including a decent sex life, when mutual attraction can no longer be taken for granted?

For those who haven’t seen the movie (yet), here’s a brief synopsis: Like many empty-nesters, Kay (Meryl Streep) and Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones) have settled into a comfortable but mind-numbing, soul-destroying routine. He goes to work every morning as an accountant, albeit with retirement plans not far off. She takes care of the house and earns a little extra money from a part-time job in a clothing store. While he’s resigned to the status quo, she wants more, in fact, she wants a different life that includes a loving relationship and – if it’s not too much to ask – a little action in the bedroom. Seeking the help of a marriage counselor seems the only way to salvage whatever is left of their former bliss.

Obviously, the film’s message stands in stark contrast to the “Fifty Shades” book series by E. L. James, often dubbed as ‘mommy porn,’ where women of all ages can find inspiration for their erotic endeavors in and outside of marriage. By comparison, “Hope Springs” is almost a turnoff, considering the long-term prospects.

In any case, talking (let alone making a film) about intimacy between older people has never been easy in our youth-oriented culture. This may be changing now in response to demographic shifts. But timeliness alone will not guarantee that a truly meaningful conversation can take place.

The way we deal with the subject of sex at the later stages in life is almost exclusively focused on issues like erectile dysfunction and other unfortunate effects of the natural aging process. Performance-enhancing drugs like Viagra and Cialis may sell better than almost any other pharmaceutical product on the planet, but in terms of treatment they offer a purely mechanical solution: As long as the plumbing keeps working, everything’s supposed to be fine. What they can’t do is to help preserve a satisfying relationship with a partner who has seemingly been around forever and offers little hope for many more surprises. Even if the desired effect kicks in every time, the ability to perform in bed is not the same as making love.

Like many couples whose marriage has come to a crossroad, Kay and Arnold take stock of all their unmet needs and expectations. Being sexually unfulfilled, although initially high on the list of their mutual misgivings, turns out only to be a symptom of a far deeper disconnect. Soon they have to realize that the deterioration of their relationship is not caused by a poor sex life, but rather the other way around. There is no love to express because there is no love to be had. Instead, an empty space is widening between them – symbolized by separate schedules, separate interests, separate bedrooms – and by the time they can no longer ignore it, they are unable to bridge it.

It is a strength of the movie to show how a ‘Me First’ attitude, common among but not limited to baby boomers, leaves us terribly unequipped to deal with these kinds of problems. Bookstores and websites overflow with professional guidance and self-help materials, but divorce rates remain high and more people are now single than married. The filmmakers were too smart to try giving any definite answers themselves. One thing, however, becomes clear: Love is still a matter of giving over taking, creation over expectation, dialogue over demand. In a way, we are warned not to expect too much and yet make the most of what we have. Not bad advice from a simple boomer flick.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “The Secret of Healthy Aging.

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Fatter, Slower, Sicker

August 12th, 2012 at 7:09 am by timigustafson
  • Comments

Just by looking at the medal count from this year’s Olympics in London, one might think of the United States as a country of athletes. If only it were so. Yes, Americans are still dominating many sports, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that a dismal state of health and physical fitness plagues the country.

According to a survey conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2011, the U.S. population is the third heaviest in the world, behind the Pacific islands of Kiribati and American Samoa. Over two thirds of all Americans are overweight, over one third are obese and struggle with numerous weight- and lifestyle-related illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease.

While the obesity crisis continues to worsen across the nation, some parts are harder hit than others. Based on a Gallup poll taken in 2011, the city of Evansville, Indiana, has the fattest population in the U.S., with nearly 40 percent of its residents being obese.

What’s even more alarming is that few Evansvillers seem to see this as a problem. In fact, many take great pride in calling their town “the nicest place to live in the U.S.”

Among the things that make Evansville so nice is the annual “West Side Nut Club Fall Festival,” a week-long binge fest specializing in fried foods, including fried brain sandwiches, a local specialty. The place is also known as a test market of sorts for the restaurant industry. “Ever heard of the McDiner? Did you ever eat pizza at McDonald’s? […] That was just one of the many perks about dining in Evansville: We were guinea pigs,” wrote Jessica Levco, a writer who grew up in what she still calls her “sweet River City.”

Not everyone in town, however, thinks that being “fat and happy” is a sustainable formula. Sam Rogers, a PR manager at a local hospital, says the high rate of obesity creates lots of problems for the city. “When I’m walking around the halls, here’s what I see: Bigger wheelchairs, bigger beds, and bigger ambulances. We had to get a lift team to move bigger patients. […] The cost of our lift team is $150,000 annually.” But, he added, “Our bariatric business is booming. We have three to five surgeries each week.”

Still, city officials say they are determined to have Evansville lose its title as the American obesity capital. “I don’t think it is particularly good news in our area,” said Stephen Austin, the mayor of neighboring Henderson, which is part of the larger metropolitan region that was included in the poll, in an interview with the Daily Mail Reporter.

And indeed, some initiatives to curb Evansville’s particularly high obesity rate have already been taken. Under the leadership of Lacy McNear, a Registered Dietitian at the local St. Mary’s Medical Center, a program called “Smart Futures Pediatric Weight Management” has been designed to help both children and parents to make healthier food choices and engage in more regular exercise.

“We’re hoping that [following the program] is a lifestyle change,” said McNear in an interview with the Evansville Courier & Press, a local newspaper. Participating families are given consultation in basic dietetics over the course of six weeks. The hope is that when parents see positive changes in their kids, they will follow suit. It could be the beginning of major turnaround, who knows.

Evansville’s story, of course, is America’s story. On the one hand, there is growing awareness that obesity is a great threat to our public health (and health care system) and that something must be done. On the other hand, there are the agricultural-, food manufacturing- and restaurant industries that cannot conceive any changes in our eating habits as anything other than loss of business. So they fight tooth and nail to maintain the status quo. And then, there are ingrained habits and preferences that are hard to break. The vast majority of Americans still consider their food choices as a personal matter and exercise of individual freedom that should not be regulated or interfered with. That’s understandable, but the consequences are plain to see.

If you enjoyed this article, you may also be interested in “Making America’s Cities More Walkable – The Benefits Are Endless.”

Timi Gustafson R.D. is a clinical dietitian and author of the book “The Healthy Diner – How to Eat Right and Still Have Fun”®, which is available on her blog, “Food and Health with Timi Gustafson R.D.” (http://www.timigustafson.com), and at amazon.com. You can follow Timi on Twitter and on Facebook.

Write your own blog

Do you have something to say? Are you passionate about a particular topic and can write regularly and coherently? We'd love to talk with you. Contact us today about blogging on this site.

Blog Search
About timigustafson

Timi Gustafson, RD, LDN, FAND is a registered dietitian, health counselor, book author, syndicated newspaper columnist and blogger. She lectures on nutrition and healthy living to audiences worldwide. She is the founder and president of Solstice Publications LLC, a publishing company specializing in health and lifestyle education. Timi completed her Clinical Dietetic Internship at the University of California Medical Center, San Francisco. She is a Fellow of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, an active member of the Washington State Dietetic Association, a member of the Diabetes Care and Education, Healthy Aging, Vegetarian Nutrition and the Sports, Cardiovascular and Wellness Nutrition practice groups. For more information, please visit http://www.timigustafson.com

*About Community Blogs

Community blogs are written by volunteers. They are members of our community but not employees of this site or newspaper. They have applied or were invited to blog here but their words are their own and are not edited by the editor or staff of this site, and have agreed to abide by our Terms of Use. The authors are solely responsible for their content. If you have concerns about something you read on a community blog, please contact the author directly or email us.

Would you like to have your own blog on our site? Contact us today.